For years we’ve been told that the internet and new technology is stopping traditional face to face communication. Parents have been warned that if their kids spend too much time surfing the net and chatting on social networking sites they’ll become void of emotion. But new research by Dr. Paul J. Zak and Adam Penenberg, a contributing writer to Fast Company, blows all this out of the water and suggests that social networking connects with people’s feelings and emotions and is something that businesses shouldn’t ignore.

According to Dr. Zak’s research, oxytocin, the hormone we release when we are hugged, shown affection or generosity, can be linked to social networking. In a series of tests on Adam Penenberg, Dr. Zak’s research showed that when using social networking sites such as Twitter, the level of Penenberg’s oxytocin increased by 13.2% and stress hormones decreased. This suggests that Penenberg’s brain sees tweeting as directly interacting with people he cares for, has empathy for and, ultimately, trusts. With these results in mind, Penenberg proposes that online relationships can be as real as offline relationships as social networking may increase a person’s oxytocin level, which can heighten feelings of trust, empathy and generosity.

So what does all this scientific talk mean for businesses trying to connect with the social consumer? Well, businesses should adopt a sense of persona and a character to help raise their profile online, connect with audiences and help earn a level of trust and empathy. Those responsible for setting strategies should understand digital sociology and psychology. The web works in the same way as human behaviour so this needs to be reflected in social media strategies.

Related articles

• Social Networking Affects Brains Like Falling in Love (fastcompany.com)
• Once More, with Feeling: Making Sense of Social Media (briansolis.com)

In a recent online poll by Faxo.com, the public was asked where they would most like popstar, Justin Bieber, to tour. The public said North Korea. When ‘the public’ cast its vote on July 7th, it was, however, predominantly made up of fans of the online bulletin board, 4chan.org, which encouraged visitors to hijack the poll and manipulate the results.

Given that Faxo.com is currently running a new poll entitled ‘‘Justin Bieber Loves Animals’’ it looks as though the site’s intentions have always been sardonic rather than sales-driven. And given that 4chan.com members delighted at the thought of sending Bieber to the ‘axis of evil’ this again looks unlikely to be a PR ploy.

This is the latest in a series of online attacks against Bieber – BBC News online reports that 4chan.com also recently encouraged visitors to search for ‘Justin Bieber Syphilis’, sending the search term up to the top of the ranks of Google Trend’s Hot Searches list. Bieber is also dead, apparently. Read the full article here – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10506482.

Bieber’s record label, Universal, has denied any involvement in the poll, calling the whole thing a hoax. Even the most guerrilla of campaigns will avoid associating clients with animals, STD’s, communism and/or death, so by process of elimination we can assume the conversations were not sparked by the Bieber marketing camp, but by a cult of Bieber-haters ready to topple the pop prince. The joke, however, is on them, because all they’ve done is give him a leg up.

Team Bieber was quick to react to the attacks, reinforcing his social media presence and ensuring he had a steady stream of tweets going out to fans both responding to the attacks – “let’s take some time to answer some crazy rumors….these are always fun.…” – and thanking them for their support – “I like answering all your questions. Thank u all for caring. Just want u to know I care to and I’m just a normal kid [sic.]”

By July 16th Mashable reported that Justin Bieber was battling with Lada Gaga for the YouTube top spot – his video for “Baby ft. Ludacris” having captured 245,746,720 views. By maintaining a strong microblogging presence and openly responding to the attacks, Bieber has successfully managed to convert what could be career-damaging sentiment into one of the most viewed online videos of all time.

The traditional tupperware party

In this week’s New Media Age we find eBay talking down social commerce. This seems a bit strange to me given it is the leading light in social retail.

Let’s think about that for a minute, the online auction site has made its name and a multi-billion dollar business, by bringing people together on a single site and giving them a platform from which they can communicate with each other in order to sell to one another.

As brands and merchants see the 500 million (almost) Facebook users as a huge potential customer base, they are building on their existing brand presence and already engaged fans to promote products and offers. Sound slightly familiar?

It is no wonder eBay’s nose is a little out of joint. By flipping over to page three of the same publication, we see that P&G has chosen to sell its Max Factor beauty products through its Facebook page. What the online auction site wouldn’t give to be the online channel-of-choice for such a brand.

The retail channel now needs to work out how it can maintain its position, and how it can do better than the brand itself, in selling to the end customer. I have to say that if this is eBay PR, it is unlikely to change the steady increase in social retail. The infamous Tupperware party is coming to a social networking site near you.

We are in the midst of the 2010 Tour de France and the race has come down to just two riders. Andy Schleck is just eight seconds behind “Berty the Accountant” (Alberto Contador) as Ned Boulting and Matt Rendal call him on their Real Peloton podcasts. It has been an amazing spectacle, cobbles, crashes, tears on the podium, mountains, more crashes, British riders in the mix and millions of Twitter posts.

This year more than ever before we are able to share in all the ups and downs of teams, riders and all other interested parties in diverse ways. Where marketing budgets for teams (marketing tools themselves) are tiny – let’s take the first year British team, Team Sky, as an example – social media has become a cornerstone of its communications plan.

Prior to this year, and it can be seen in Formula One as well, Facebook fan pages and especially Twitter profiles were the preserve of a limited number of tech savvy competitors looking to build their own brand. 2010 however, has seen a holistic approach to social networking as a seriously cost effective channel to fans.

Looking more closely at Team Sky you find the website is supported by a Facebook page, a Twitter profile and a blog (only in name as nowhere to add comment) on the website. Add to this the set of individual rider’s Twitter profiles and the whole story of the team’s race can be gleaned in just a few minutes.

If success is measured in numbers, and it most often is, then Team RadioShack - undoubtedly due to the presence of Lance Armstrong – has the social media yellow jersey. Team Sky do well with over 42,000 fans, while the current yellow jersey wearer’s team has just 2,133 fans. That said the current race leader himself has almost 70,000 followers on Twitter, damn good when he is only following 16.

We are seeing a real revolution in sports marketing. Fans have always been fans, but with social media the ability to get to share in the success and disappointment of your heroes, almost as it happens and directly from them, creates a much stronger bond for that fan with that sports person as a brand.

Having said that, you can get too much of a good thing. At the moment I have to avoid using Twitter for large portions of the afternoon and evening so I don’t see who wins the stage before catching the highlights on TV that evening. But, once the stage is over, I am straight onto TweetDeck to get the inside track on what the riders are saying.  Word of mouth marketing has never had such a perfect case study.

Facebook is expected to reach the very impressive 500 million user milestone this week. Putting this half billion member mark in perspective, The Washington Post reports that, “the population inhabiting Facebook now equals that of the United States, Japan and Germany combined. Or, two Mexicos and a Brazil.”

Facebook reached 400 million users five months ago. This time last year, it had just reached 200 million, and eight months before that it was at 100 million. Facebook has certainly come a long way since its launch in February 2004 and has become the most popular social site on the web. It poses the question, how on earth did we communicate with our friend’s before Facebook? Did we actually pick up the phone and speak to them?!

Plus it’s not only consumers reaping the rewards of this social networking phenomenon, but it’s clear that brands can also benefit. Many use Facebook as a channel for developing direct relationships with customers and as a platform for sharing and discovering rich content.

But I digress….

In light of this impending milestone, one of the Facebook marketing gurus said that the site plans to celebrate it  with ‘Facebook Stories’, a collection of real-life memories from Facebook users about how the social networking site has impacted their lives. She said that while previous announcements of this nature have been about the numbers, this time the company wants it to be all about the users.

Users could submit their yarn in 420 characters or less. The stories will then be organised into a ‘visual memorial’ by geographical location and by themes such as “finding love,” “coping with grief” and “natural disasters.”

Facebook has already posted a form through which you can submit your own story. If your story becomes popular — that is, if it gets more “Likes” than most — it could be featured among other popular stories.

Got any memories to share…?

Image via Wikipedia

As I ponder England’s dispirited performance in the World Cup, or to be more honest, listen to my colleagues discuss it, I wonder about what makes us great. How can we be our best? Apparently, the Spanish had nothing to lose. They could play with no fear. A united team that played to its strengths and had the spirit to win.

I read an interesting article in the FT this week from Lucy Kellaway ‘It’s time to sack appraisals’. She argues that appraisals are a waste of time.

I agree. Mostly.

Lucy suggests that real management is preferable – absolutely right. If managers stopped to give real constructive feedback on the spot – people would have a clear idea of what is expected.

However, often people don’t seize the moment. And later at appraisal time they hide behind jargon, complex templates and cut-and-paste objectives and imagine that is managing. They simply don’t have the appetite, tools or training to do it properly.

Well thought through appraisals are valuable. Even where real on the job management is happening. I’ve seen success stories where someone has been able to improve their performance and turn a corner. Or consolidate their experience to earn a promotion.

A clear roadmap of career development is often cited as a core driver for job satisfaction and the appraisal system allows for that. Put simply, people are motivated by making progress.

Engaged staff make for happy clients and a successful business.

But surely the flipside is equally important. Without appraisals the good can’t get better, but the bad can’t get fired. Ditching appraisals is the business management equivalent of issuing staff with a Cappello contract.

In a competitive world, we can’t afford to coast. Appraisals, used right, are effective tools for ensuring we perform. After all what business can succeed in an environment of enduring mediocrity?

I recently attended a WOM UK briefing run by Reed Smith on the subject of ‘the benefits and legal risks of Word of Mouth Marketing in Social Media.’ One of the subjects touched upon was moderation; when inviting comment from the public, how much responsibility does the publisher have for the content that’s uploaded to their website?

This is an issue that’s undoubtedly on the radar of the HM Treasury this week as they opened ‘The Spending Challenge’ to the public for the first time. For those of you unfamiliar with the idea, ‘The Spending Challenge’ is essentially a forum that allows the public to suggest ideas for where spending cuts could be made to tackle the budget deficit. Recent criticism stems from the fact that the site’s moderators have been allowing offensive comments to remain visible to anyone who visits the site. A quick search through recent comments on ‘The Spending Challenge’ website reveals a multitude of comments tagged by users under terms including ‘hate crime,’ ‘hate,’ ‘facist’ and  ‘racial hatred.’ There’s a witty summary of the latest posts here entitled ‘Race hate meets comedy gold.’

What’s actually a potentially brilliant tactic by the government to engage the public in the debt crisis recovery is now in danger of becoming drastically tarnished by negative media coverage and sarcastic Tweets.

Crowdsourcing is one of the latest buzz words in social media at the moment with many brands seeing the benefits of both customer engagement and business/product development. However, ‘The Spending Challenge’ shows that inviting opinions on any subject which has the potential for defamatory material and comment needs a carefully considered moderation plan. Is a ‘Notify and Take Down’ system always the right method in these situations?

It will be interesting to watch the steps taken by the government to control the current media backlash on ‘The Spending Challenge.’ Clearly, a more rigorous moderation process is needed to ensure the public’s suggestions are constructive and serve the website’s purpose. For those of us in the PR & Marketing industry, it’s a stark reminder of how unwieldy a tool the web really is. Whilst crowdsourcing might sound like a great campaign tactic, it’s vital to remember that we can’t control what people say on websites and social media platforms. The potential for damaging coverage and comments is ever present and it’s the average savvy webuser who is the most stringent moderator of them all.

So I probably should have got round to writing this last week, but seeing as I’m STILL mentioning Social Media Influence in about 90% of my conversations, I’ve decided it does warrant a post.

Image via Wikipedia

Social Media Influence 2010 was held at London’s Marriott Hotel on June 22^nd. An all day conference, it was interesting because, for the most part, it wasn’t simply a lot of people saying ‘isn’t social media great?’ (although there was some of that.) We know social media is great, we wouldn’t be here otherwise. There was some real insight from global brands such as Starbucks, Pepsico and Dell, alongside discussion panels and Q&A sessions.

The main thing that I took away from the day was that brands and agencies need to be prepared to take risks. Social media is new; the rules haven’t been defined so it’s not always about following the tried and tested. Think big, think new: most of the time your ambition will be respected, even if the results aren’t what you hoped for. Starbucks in the States has built a reputation for being one of the most forward thinking brands globally – they’ve pioneered mayor offers and badges on foursquare, organised a global sing-along on YouTube and built a massive community along the way. How many sales have they generated directly from social media? (This was a question on the day). They’re not sure, but at this level of exposure, it’s not really the point: the intangible brand value of being seen as an innovator is huge.

Having the support to take risks in social media comes from making the tools, platforms and activities an integral part of all of your activity. Stakeholders love the immediacy of social media interaction and (sometimes) the results. Pepsico has tapped into this by creating a social media war room – a physical bank of computers and screens that sits in the middle of the office, providing live updates from its brands’ social media pages. Social media is THERE, in-your-face, the buzz of the activity clear for everyone to see. Check it out for yourself here. There are risks and implications in going down this route, but social media isn’t about being perfect, it’s about being good, and Pepsico are demonstrating that perfectly.

Ultimately, being bold and brave will bring rewards, but it might bring a little bit of egg on your face. It’s nothing to be afraid of; you’ll often learn more from an unsuccessful campaign than you will from an award winning one. Key phrase of the day? It’s easier to ask for forgiveness than to get permission. So what are you waiting for?